Roads and traffic boss's secret payout

Remember Paul Forward? He's the former head of the Roads and Traffic Authority sacked by then roads minister Joe Tripodi who figured, wrongly as it turned out, that axing his top public servant might save him from a similar fate.

When Forward was cut down in October for failing to make public changes to the Cross City Tunnel contract, he joined the list of unattached senior government officers, and cooled his heels while he drew his $342,000 salary and kept his mouth shut.

Ten days before Christmas, he wrote to the Government's Statutory and Other Offices Remuneration Tribunal seeking compensation. The tribunal replied four days later telling him how much they'd awarded him. How much it decided taxpayers must give Forward has been declared a secret.

That's the way it works in the NSW Government. Taxpayers are allowed to know how much top public servants get paid when they have a job, but are not allowed to know how much they get paid when politicians sack them.

If junior public servants get sacked and want compensation, they go to the Industrial Commission. Anyone who wants can sit in and listen to the evidence and any decision on compensation.

So why this double standard? When the Herald lodged a freedom of information request for details of Forward's settlement, it was refused on the grounds this information would disclose "matter relating to the judicial functions of a court", namely the remuneration tribunal.

The we appealed, and the RTA's director of motorways, Les Wielinga, came up with a second reason: releasing the documents would result in the "unreasonable disclosure of Mr Forward's personal affairs ... namely his personal address".

Of course Wielinga could have used the black pen to remove this irrelevent information, but he chose not to.

Instead he cited two other bits of evidence to argue it was unreasonable to disclose the package. The first was that Forward "claimed the letter and the determination contain information concerning his personal affairs" and the other was the details of the tribunal's determination were "related to" Forward's financial affairs and "particularly private".

How can it be that a minister sacks a public servant, gives a public explanation for doing so, and yet the payout is kept secret? What about the public interest in knowing the cost of Tripodi's actions?

The tribunal routinely publishes its decisions on how much to increase the pay of senior public servants and judges.

Its determinations are public, the salaries of all public servants are public and so are the arguments public servants submit in support of their salary increases.

Yet the RTA says Forward's payout can't be revealed for fear of disclosing matters ``relating to'' the functions of the tribunal.

It won't say why revealing Forward's payout relates to the functions of the tribunal any more than the tribunal's publication last year that the salary of the Chief Justice, Jim Spiegelman, increased to $329,050.

One of the ridiculous things about the RTA decision is there is already a law which caps payouts to people like Forward at a maximum of 38 weeks or, in his case, about $250,000. Does that number really need to be secret?

Matthew Moore is the Herald's FOI editor.

Contact him at foi@smh.com.au if you know of a document he should be chasing or if you've been frustrated getting documents under FOI laws.

LATEST COMMENTS

Loved the irony of your article of 10 June. The RTA are a pack of incompetent bastards, who work tirelessly to cover their own tracks when they stuff up. Thank you for exposing them. Any payout to any public servant should be a matter of public record, because we, the public, are paying them. Does the relevant Minister have anything to say about this latest coverup?
Roll on the next state election in March 2007. Then we can put an axe through the lot of them.

Posted by: Ian Stevenson on June 10, 2006 3:58 PM

Really this is unacceptable.

Please SMH, continue to appeal this decision. Public Enemey could easily replace 911 with FOI - as in FOI is a joke.

I am one on of the boofheads who has always voted Labor. But I will not vote Labor at the next state election because of the disastrous economic decisions the ALP keep heaping on stupid stupid people like me who keep voting them in.

I mean really, at least with a Liberal govt for a while a whole lot of people - specifically Iemma, Costa and Roosendal - can disappear with their super and spare the public from their disastrous policies.

And then the public service can be depoliticised.

Oh stuff like this makes me angry.

Why can't there be a law requiring complete transparency of any and all matters involving the public purse.

And don't give me commercial in confidence humbug.

Now is the winter of the electorate's discontent.

Enjoy the annual Labor conference Morris -it will be your last as leader.

Posted by: Pro-Vice Chancellor on June 10, 2006 6:36 PM

Boy, did I make a mistake 40yrs ago. Should have joined a political party, any party would have done - i'm not proud. Just imagine the money I could have made by now !!!
And to keep it secret all I have to do is introduce stupid laws and rules that disallow anyone to enquire about it.

Posted by: Terry on June 10, 2006 8:41 PM

Good on you SMH annd Mr Moore - you should agressively persue this and FOI generally.

The RTA is now the one of the most inefficient parts of the NSW Government, followed closely by NSW health. Both need major reform and public accountability, ie transparency.

The RTA's biggest problem is ... the RTA. Why should I vote ALP again - they've had ample time to resolve this.

Posted by: Ian on June 11, 2006 9:33 AM

Your reticence in posting an estimate of Mr. Forward's payout is a cop out. I have no doubt that a figure estimated by you would be close to the mark.
You are not in this game without having "reliable information".
So be brave, what have you got to lose.

Posted by: Jan Dekker on June 11, 2006 10:55 AM

If there is a law which caps payouts how can the public be assured that there has not been a breach of that law, unless the information sought is disclosed? Is this secrecy then a matter for the ICAC?

Posted by: Peter McDonell on June 11, 2006 3:50 PM

Labor or Liberal, both are into rorts like this.
In earlier days this type of party games made the working class go into strike action, lay down the tools.
What can be done now ?. Only winge and moan.

Posted by: Stevo on June 12, 2006 9:01 AM

No worries - a few more revenue-raising cameras placed in ineffective (but highly lucrative) locations, and the RTA can extort all the loot they need in no time at all.